Assignment for Chapter 8View the video discussion and write up a group response (Josh and Gary)This part due to be posted by July 25th
.
According to Rex Schutlze, teachers do not have the right to teach whatever they want.The teachers must teach within the curriculum that the school district has adopted.Varying from this could result in termination of a job due to insubordination.Additionally, elements of teaching instruction may be expected depending upon the district.For example, many schools have adopted the Madeline Hunter set of procedures and teachers in that district would be required to touch upon each step in that process.
Some districts have ‘controversial issue clauses’ which state how instruction on certain issues should be handle.This allows uniformity across the board on controversial issues and provides the teachers and administration some security when dealing with these topics.
There are 2 areas of speech that are not protected by the first amendment.They are: matters of personal interest and matters of public concern made during the course of employment.Matters of public concern spoken as a citizen are however likely to be protected.
It is allowable and appropriate for the district to set standards for teacher attire.Teachers are allowed to wear religious clothing if it doesn’t present itself as a problem or interfere with the teacher’s job.All teachers must also wear clothing that doesn’t provide safety concerns.
Administrators are not allowed to discriminate based on many moral decisions including pregnancy, even out of wedlock.However, if criminal charges are filed against a teacher, than the administration does have ground to discipline accordingly.
Many cases against teachers are built upon what society would consider as morally acceptable.All cases are different dependent upon what each school district and judge or jury would consider being morally acceptable.It would be important to show how the teacher’s action relates to problems in the classroom.
Many times administration is not allowed to legally discipline their teachers based upon what moral actions that teacher is making.What many need to happen is a discussion with that teacher showing how their actions are affecting their job or view in society.
In one major case, Mrs. Eschom was assigned to teach out of her endorsed area and received 3 negatives out of 36 total criteria.The courts ruled that it was just cause to terminate her contract and each school district could evaluate their criteria as desired.
In another case, Mr. Johansson had done many outrageous acts, but his termination was not upheld by the district courts.This was likely based on that fact that administrative witness was not used or used effectively.
Another key case was the McQuinn case.It was ruled that the board may go into executive session to discuss personnel issues.Also, parental and other staff complaints are to be put in writing to verify their witness.
It is critical that administrators refuse to accept information on the “QT”.If a parent or teacher is going to complain to an administrator they should put their complaint in writing and follow the complaint procedures.Administrators should request that parents and teachers follow these procedures or not complain.
The Boss and Cox cases reinforce that administrators must meet the statutory requirements when evaluating staff.Administrators must note deficiencies, provide a list of deficiencies, the statues require next day, suggestions for improvement and follow-up evaluations.In the Cox case the board voted for non-renewal and the administrator evaluated Cox on the following day.The administrator did not follow the statutory requirements and the school had to pay Cox for two years of lost salary.
April 15 deadline is important.The Bentley case, the board voted to not renew the teaching contract and delivered the letter on April 16th signed by the superintendent, but the date had passed.The letter must be signed by superintendent and the board president if tenured or by the superintendent if it is a probationary teacher.Remember deliver the notice be April 15.Do not run against the date.It is suggested to deliver by April 1.The Bickford and Ziboro cases regard school guidance counselors that were insubordinate.If the bad conduct happens after April 15 or subsequent dates, it is a basis for cancellation of the contract.Additionally, prior conduct may be used as evidence.April 15 is the deadline for RIF notices.Administrators must insure that they are riffing the right person.An effective administrator will review RIF criteria and double check that the correct person is being released.
March 15 is the date that teachers may affirm they are going to return.Administrators may request the information earlier, however, the teacher is not required to respond until this date.If a teacher does not respond the contract does not have to be renewed.It is critical that administrators make sure that they are affirming intention to return and not offering employment.Students may reference the Nibalski case.Continuing contract is assumed even if the teacher has not signed the contract.They are automatically renewed unless notified of no intent to return.It is important to consider if posting a list for renewal that leaving off a name may be a breech of confidentiality since others will be aware that the teacher was not renewed.
Assignment for Chapter 8 View the video discussion and write up a group response (Josh and Gary) This part due to be posted by July 25th
.
According to Rex Schutlze, teachers do not have the right to teach whatever they want. The teachers must teach within the curriculum that the school district has adopted. Varying from this could result in termination of a job due to insubordination. Additionally, elements of teaching instruction may be expected depending upon the district. For example, many schools have adopted the Madeline Hunter set of procedures and teachers in that district would be required to touch upon each step in that process.Some districts have ‘controversial issue clauses’ which state how instruction on certain issues should be handle. This allows uniformity across the board on controversial issues and provides the teachers and administration some security when dealing with these topics.
There are 2 areas of speech that are not protected by the first amendment. They are: matters of personal interest and matters of public concern made during the course of employment. Matters of public concern spoken as a citizen are however likely to be protected.
It is allowable and appropriate for the district to set standards for teacher attire. Teachers are allowed to wear religious clothing if it doesn’t present itself as a problem or interfere with the teacher’s job. All teachers must also wear clothing that doesn’t provide safety concerns.
Administrators are not allowed to discriminate based on many moral decisions including pregnancy, even out of wedlock. However, if criminal charges are filed against a teacher, than the administration does have ground to discipline accordingly.
Many cases against teachers are built upon what society would consider as morally acceptable. All cases are different dependent upon what each school district and judge or jury would consider being morally acceptable. It would be important to show how the teacher’s action relates to problems in the classroom.
Many times administration is not allowed to legally discipline their teachers based upon what moral actions that teacher is making. What many need to happen is a discussion with that teacher showing how their actions are affecting their job or view in society.
In one major case, Mrs. Eschom was assigned to teach out of her endorsed area and received 3 negatives out of 36 total criteria. The courts ruled that it was just cause to terminate her contract and each school district could evaluate their criteria as desired.
In another case, Mr. Johansson had done many outrageous acts, but his termination was not upheld by the district courts. This was likely based on that fact that administrative witness was not used or used effectively.
Another key case was the McQuinn case. It was ruled that the board may go into executive session to discuss personnel issues. Also, parental and other staff complaints are to be put in writing to verify their witness.
It is critical that administrators refuse to accept information on the “QT”. If a parent or teacher is going to complain to an administrator they should put their complaint in writing and follow the complaint procedures. Administrators should request that parents and teachers follow these procedures or not complain.
The Boss and Cox cases reinforce that administrators must meet the statutory requirements when evaluating staff. Administrators must note deficiencies, provide a list of deficiencies, the statues require next day, suggestions for improvement and follow-up evaluations. In the Cox case the board voted for non-renewal and the administrator evaluated Cox on the following day. The administrator did not follow the statutory requirements and the school had to pay Cox for two years of lost salary.
April 15 deadline is important. The Bentley case, the board voted to not renew the teaching contract and delivered the letter on April 16th signed by the superintendent, but the date had passed. The letter must be signed by superintendent and the board president if tenured or by the superintendent if it is a probationary teacher. Remember deliver the notice be April 15. Do not run against the date. It is suggested to deliver by April 1. The Bickford and Ziboro cases regard school guidance counselors that were insubordinate. If the bad conduct happens after April 15 or subsequent dates, it is a basis for cancellation of the contract. Additionally, prior conduct may be used as evidence. April 15 is the deadline for RIF notices. Administrators must insure that they are riffing the right person. An effective administrator will review RIF criteria and double check that the correct person is being released.
March 15 is the date that teachers may affirm they are going to return. Administrators may request the information earlier, however, the teacher is not required to respond until this date. If a teacher does not respond the contract does not have to be renewed. It is critical that administrators make sure that they are affirming intention to return and not offering employment. Students may reference the Nibalski case. Continuing contract is assumed even if the teacher has not signed the contract. They are automatically renewed unless notified of no intent to return. It is important to consider if posting a list for renewal that leaving off a name may be a breech of confidentiality since others will be aware that the teacher was not renewed.